Unrest in Sri Lanka

[Original TMNT Cartoon Fan]

Sri Lanka experiences an economic crisis. Mass protests have begun, and President Gotabaya Rajapaksa has escaped to the Maldives in a military jet airplane.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-62132271

[1987]

Good for them. They are showing US what a real insurrection looks like

[mrmaczaps]

Originally Posted by 1987

Good for them. They are showing US what a real insurrection looks like

https://i.imgur.com/RRKTxLg.jpg?1

https://i.imgur.com/pZFnHLl.jpg?1

Is it really insurrection when you win? Lol

[Andrew NDB]

Originally Posted by mrmaczaps

Is it really insurrection when you win? Lol

It would be "a successful insurrection" and not "an attempted insurrection," no?

[mrmaczaps]

Originally Posted by Andrew NDB

It would be "a successful insurrection" and not "an attempted insurrection," no?

Revolution? Maybe. Sure. Tyrants lost but what kind of leadership will emerge now?

[ZariusTwo]

Originally Posted by mrmaczaps

Revolution? Maybe. Sure. Tyrants lost but what kind of leadership will emerge now?

That's what happens at the end of all insurrections/mass protests. You're left with an uncertainty vacuum and nobody really knows what to do with all the 'freedom' they have so control is needed once again, and that brings with it a whole other set of problems because everyone has a different idea of what authority should represent...and sides are taken when they eventually settle down and have to debate that, which creates entirely different camps, some of which will probably protest whatever side wins out in an election and as soon as that new governing body f*cks up.

[superstaff]

Originally Posted by ZariusTwo

That's what happens at the end of all insurrections/mass protests. You're left with an uncertainty vacuum and nobody really knows what to do with all the 'freedom' they have so control is needed once again, and that brings with it a whole other set of problems because everyone has a different idea of what authority should represent...and sides are taken when they eventually settle down and have to debate that, which creates entirely different camps, some of which will probably protest whatever side wins out in an election and as soon as that new governing body f*cks up.

Yeah, this about sums it up.

Kind of funny because many of the same people who turn their noses down on socialism and communism, will unironically throw out 'anarchy' as the correct form of government. Just like socialism and communism have failed, anarchy has also failed whenever it's been initiated because, at the end of the day, human beings can't and don't want to govern themselves. After 2020, it should be obvious to people, especially the conservatives who cheer on anarchy, that humans want a 'daddy' to tell them how to live. They need someone to guide them. Inherently, having a leader isn't a bad thing, of course, but...we end up coming back around to having elections, politicians, corruption, etc eventually. All the same societal problems spring up with a slightly different flavor. It's an endless cycle, and humanity never learns.

[Sumac]

I've yet to see any conservatives pushing for an anarchy.

[superstaff]

Originally Posted by Sumac

I've yet to see any conservatives pushing for an anarchy.

I see it mostly in other places online, but I see a lot of conservative/right leaning types who say the "best government is no government". When it comes to conservatives, I see a splintered view on what the 'best' form of government to be. I've also known nutcases who think we should all be governed under the Christian bible and church, as if that's going to be automatically less draconian.

[Sumac]

Originally Posted by superstaff

I see it mostly in other places online, but I see a lot of conservative/right leaning types who say the "best government is no government". When it comes to conservatives, I see a splintered view on what the 'best' form of government to be. I've also known nutcases who think we should all be governed under the Christian bible and church, as if that's going to be automatically less draconian.

It doesn't make any sense.
By their very nature Conservatives for Anarchy is a nonsense.

[Andrew NDB]

Conservatives tend to like LESS government, maybe significantly less government, but certainly not no government.

[superstaff]

Originally Posted by Andrew NDB

Conservatives tend to like LESS government, maybe significantly less government, but certainly not no government.

Maybe the ones you know.

And I dunno, some conservatives seem fine with more government if it's for stuff they approve of.

[Andrew NDB]

And I dunno, some conservatives seem fine with more government if it's for stuff they approve of.

I'm sure there are a few conservatives that feel that way, maybe, but 1000%, hand over fist it is way, way more the left that wants to expand government for exactly that sentiment. For the stuff they approve of (generally all kinds of climate change stuff, LGBTQ stuff, expanding "voting rights," etc.). They are super loud about it and you see and hear their wishes to this end everywhere, everyday. This isn't remotely a secret and not remotely comparable to any alleged conservatives wanting more government.

[superstaff]

Originally Posted by Andrew NDB

I'm sure there are a few conservatives that feel that way, maybe, but 1000%, hand over fist it is way, way more the left that wants to expand government for exactly that sentiment. For the stuff they approve of (generally all kinds of climate change stuff, LGBTQ stuff, expanding "voting rights," etc.). They are super loud about it and you see and hear their wishes to this end everywhere, everyday. This isn't a secret.

Both sides are loud, and obnoxious about what they want.

[Leo656]

Normally I'd agree that it's The Left who wants bigger government and more control. But with conservatives pushing to ban contraceptives and institute checkpoints at the states' borders to trap pregnant women, as well as overturn gay marriage, I can't in good conscience agree that the Right wants the government to have "less control". Many of them openly want a Christofascist police state and aren't shy about it.

Extremism has always been "the real enemy", but now everything is so polarized that there's nobody left on either side BUT extremists. So we're in for some very tough road ahead.

[Andrew NDB]

Originally Posted by Leo656

Normally I'd agree that it's The Left who wants bigger government and more control. But with conservatives pushing to ban contraceptives and institute checkpoints at the states' borders to trap pregnant women, as well as overturn gay marriage, I can't in good conscience agree that the Right wants the government to have "less control". Many of them openly want a Christofascist police state and aren't shy about it.

More control, sure. But not bigger government. Though the left wants to control more things than the right is interested in controlling. And only one side is interested in banning free speech.

[mrmaczaps]

Which conservatives are calling for a ban on contraceptives?

Personally, I want The Gov out of Marriage completely... its none of their damn business.

Only people I've heard of wanting state border patrols is for people who aren't vaxxed and thats Lunatic Leftists... Name the conservatives calling for Pregnant checks at state borders? All the ones I know just want people to accept responsibility for their own actions & stop demanding that everyone else pay for whatever it is they don't want to deal with themselves because of those poor life choices. And we'd kind of like you to stop murdering the unborn.

The Right isn't looking to control speech, lock people in their homes, fire people for not being poised by the Fed/Big Pharma.

Frankly, if its not described in the COTUS as a Fed thing, it belongs as a State Level thing & up to the voters.

[Leo656]

I'd argue that losing the freedom to DO what you want trumps losing the freedom to SAY what you want. Both are important, but Actions are bigger than Words.

And I'd also argue that having a "small government" where the fewer individuals involved hold even greater authority over everyone else isn't any "better" than a larger and more invasive government. It's just as lousy from the other direction. Worse when the few hands guiding that "smaller government" take their values from a fairy tale book written by people who thought gravity was something a wizard made happen.

The Left wants a large government that forces you to behave Exactly As They Say You Should. The Right wants a small government that STILL forces you to behave Exactly As They Say You Should.

The only difference I see at this point, is the prospective number of bureaucrats left "in charge" when all's said and done, and that most Liberals don't believe in what the fairy tale book says. They may want slightly different things on a smaller scale, but on a macro scale both sides are turning into the Gestapo a lot faster than they want to admit.

You lean too hard into either side of the political spectrum, you end up with fascists. That's where we're at now; two groups of fascists arguing that their specific flavor of fascism is gonna go down smoother than the other team's.

[IMJ]

Originally Posted by superstaff

Maybe the ones you know.

And I dunno, some conservatives seem fine with more government if it's for stuff they approve of.

The actual primary tenet of most people who lean even slightly right is a belief in our way of life which means that capitalism allows for ingenuity and personal success. E.g., less government because it's "on us to do it". The middle and right tend to say "give me the tools I need to build my dream in this country" to government.

The primary tenet of the left, especially the far left is beyond the shadow of a doubt "take it off of me, hide in the group for my own well being and have the government deliver what I need and want". The left and far left tend to say "give me what I need to survive and make me happy" to government.

What I've said will be argued as "opinion" by most leftist, but it is hard fact and part of the polarizing process. The words I've used above encapsulates the social leanings within the political science.

[Leo656]

Originally Posted by mrmaczaps

Frankly, if its not described in the COTUS as a Fed thing, it belongs as a State Level thing & up to the voters.

States' Rights is bullsh*t. It's just a way for people who want Bad Things to argue they should be allowed to have Bad Things as long as their "community" agrees with them.

There are people Right Now in states like Texas and Mississippi who argue that desegregated schools "ruined" the public school system. More than half a century since it was "a settled issue", people are still banging the drum that their little Klan Members In Training shouldn't have to sit on the bus or at the lunch table with a black kid. And lest we forget, the only way desegregation even happened was by armed soldiers escorting little black children into those schools to protect them. Otherwise they'd have been lynched, and that would be allowed, if left up to the people in those states. And people are actively pushing to set us back to that point in time, arguing that all the racial tension recently "proves" that "segregation doesn't work, we need to stick to our own for everyone's benefit." And some of those people have Actual Power to see it done, if allowed.

Sometimes "progress" can't be left up to individuals, because people are bigoted and stupid. Sometimes you HAVE to force it and tell them "Tough luck if you don't like it." Otherwise nothing ever gets done.

If "States' Rights" were allowed to gain traction, half the country would still have Whites Only signs everywhere, and you'd be allowed to kick gay people out of your restaurant just for being gay. Right now in Tennessee, they're trying to allow businesses to put up "No Jews Allowed" signs and refuse service, so long as there's another business in the immediate area that will serve the Jews. Tell me that doesn't sound like Nazi Germany in its formative years and I'll laugh in your f*cking face.

"States' Rights" is nonsense. It's nothing but a way for a group of idiots to say, "We should be ALLOWED to be idiots, as long as everyone in this neighborhood agrees!" Nope. One country, one set of rules, at least as far as things that Actually Matter.